Tesla truck will require the energy of 4000 homes just to recharge

[ArcticCrusher]

1 hour ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

No it isn't, it's reasonably 2-5x the real draw.

Neal

Most of the draw from homes comes during peak demands not while homeowners are sleeping.  

[AKIQPilot]

12 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

So how do we improve our technology, people seem to hate government efficiency standards.  Raising fuel prices to force efficiency also draws ire.  

It would be interesting to see Musks investment profile in non-electric tech for semis.

Neal

The europeans are improving efficiency and fuel economy by making the trucks and trailers very aerodynamic.  They are improving HP with multi turbos and small displacement.  They match the HP/TQ needs of the load with the tractor.  The tractors are rated  by their torque and load carrying capacity.  They set speed limits on commercial vehicles and the limits are clearly posted on the back of the vehicle.  The speed limits for many OTR commercial trucks is 80KPH.  

I'm sure there are many more things they do to improve fuel economy and lower the cost of transportation.  I would guess matching the HP/TQ needs to the load, improved aerodynamics and lower speed limits go a long way toward their 14MPG.  

In the US many OTR trucks are rolling down the Hwy at or above 70MPH.  There is no doubt this sucks lots of fuel.  

[Rod]

51 minutes ago, AKIQPilot said:

Yes they are pulling less weight for sure.  They use rail for much of the really heavy loads.  And, I'm pretty sure they aren't using DEF any more.   

I can deal with DPF but DEF is fucking garbage. So much complexity and down time for such a minuscule amount of emissions 

[NaturallyAspirated]

20 minutes ago, ArcticCrusher said:

Most of the draw from homes comes during peak demands not while homeowners are sleeping.  

That's a given.

Neal

[Rod]

Petroleum is such an amazing form of transferable and stored energy really. 

[AKIQPilot]

Just now, Rod Johnson said:

 

1 minute ago, Rod Johnson said:

Petroleum is such an amazing form of transferable and stored energy really. 

Nothing else comes even close really.  

[XCR1250]

6 hours ago, favoritos said:

It is surprising how much power infrastructure has been built in rural areas in the past few years.  I have seen quite a few windmills, solar farms, and power lines being constructed in areas that have less people.  Most of the new power poles still have quite a bit of room to add lines.  The proposed maps for additional generation from solar and wind are quite ambitious.   There is a strong planning structure in place to add power.  One thing I have not seen is the plan for replacement of these "new" power generating structures.  The lifespan of current solar and wind equipment is relatively short.

 

BTW, why do the new power poles all look like they are rusting?  They look that way immediately after installation.  That also seems like a short term plan if they really are rusting.

That's known as protective rust, it won't rust any more than what you see.

[BOHICA]

I don’t think euro emissions called for def previously.  I think euro 6 standard does though.  If euro had def when the us did they most likely would not have days when  ICE vehicles use is banned to unhealthy air  /smog levels.  Def is one of the complements that greatly reduces unhealthy air levels.

on all the diesels we run at work...  def is one of the least problematic systems on a modern diesel

[Rod]

For us it's by far the most problematic. Constant pump and pressure issues 

[NaturallyAspirated]

23 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said:

Petroleum is such an amazing form of transferable and stored energy really. 

It is easily transferable, but not very efficient for storing energy.

Neal

[f7ben]

53 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

It is easily transferable, but not very efficient for storing energy.

Neal

The issue with petro use as a source of energy is technology utilizing it is maxed out. There is only so much efficiency you can reap with combustion as the source.

Conversely we are at the very dawn of innovation regarding alternative sources of energy and the advances that will come and come quickly will relegate use of fossil fuels to the likes of stone age idiocy. They fueled our industrial age but they will not fuel the age of technology.

The likes of Toyler Buttcocks would have been standing around extolling the virtues of horse drawn buggies because the Model A was too complicated for him to understand.

Small minds are the scourge of the day.....thank god for the Elon Musks of the world

 

[Mileage Psycho]

2 hours ago, AKIQPilot said:

Not everywhere.  In Central Europe they are replacing nuclear power plants with solar arrays and wind farms.  As the nuclear plants are shut down Coal fired plants have to run more and longer when there is extra need for energy like at night and when the wind isn't blowing.  This is happening in many countries who are trying to replace nuclear energy with renewable energy.  The CO2 emissions for those countries is going up.  Electrical power generation is not getting greener every day.  Try not to swallow that shit sandwich all in one bite.  

 https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/german-co2-emissions-rise-2015-despite-renewables-surge

https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/german-carbon-emissions-rise-2016-despite-coal-use-drop

Sorry but coal plants such as supercritical and ultra supercritical are running cleaner and there is much more clean coal tech to come on-line with carbon capture and storage tech, then there is natgas generation, and of course we know that the renewable sources are growing, so do yourself some research instead eating shit sandwiches  

 

[Rod]

1 hour ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

It is easily transferable, but not very efficient for storing energy.

Neal

Takes a lot less volume and space and weight than batteries 

Edited November 28, 2017 by Rod Johnson

[NaturallyAspirated]

1 hour ago, Rod Johnson said:

Takes a lot less volume and space and weight than batteries 

Sure, batteries are not very efficient at present either.  

Neal

[Rod]

43 minutes ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

Sure, batteries are not very efficient at present either.  

Neal

No, look forward to the day they get there though. I don't know how these large lithium batteries are in the cold either. Any of the ones I've used are useless in the cold.

[ArcticCrusher]

4 minutes ago, Rod Johnson said:

No, look forward to the day they get there though. I don't know how these large lithium batteries are in the cold either. Any of the ones I've used are useless in the cold.

That is why NiCa are still used in the real cold.

[AKIQPilot]

1 hour ago, Mileage Psycho said:

Sorry but coal plants such as supercritical and ultra supercritical are running cleaner and there is much more clean coal tech to come on-line with carbon capture and storage tech, then there is natgas generation, and of course we know that the renewable sources are growing, so do yourself some research instead eating shit sandwiches  

 

You didn't read the links I provided.  I could post dozens more if that would help.  It is not a fact that electrical power generation is getting greener every day.  Renewables have an environmental impact often as bad as some fossil fuels.  

[NaturallyAspirated]

31 minutes ago, AKIQPilot said:

You didn't read the links I provided.  I could post dozens more if that would help.  It is not a fact that electrical power generation is getting greener every day.  Renewables have an environmental impact often as bad as some fossil fuels.  

Wind has been going nuts here in the Midwest.  South Dakota went from 11% to 25% of state capacity generation via wind in short time span.  Hell, we export a massive amount, and Xcel is on pace to be the first company over  to have 10,000MW generated by wind thanks to massive farms here.

I'd like to see more nuke plants being developed too.  

We can do better and it's sad to see coal lobbying so hard to remove the Clean Power Plan.  

Neal

Edited November 29, 2017 by NaturallyAspirated

[ArcticCrusher]

2 hours ago, Mileage Psycho said:

Sorry but coal plants such as supercritical and ultra supercritical are running cleaner and there is much more clean coal tech to come on-line with carbon capture and storage tech, then there is natgas generation, and of course we know that the renewable sources are growing, so do yourself some research instead eating shit sandwiches  

 

Have you visited any?  I have been in a number in the Dakotas going back over 10 years and they are impressive.  

[BOHICA]

As the developed the countries transitions from coal to other forms of energy, the underdeveloped countries are sucking every bit of coal that we cut from use and use it for their energy needs.  Coal has a very vibrant future and will see expansion as these developing countries thirst for cheap energy continues to increase.

[Mileage Psycho]

2 hours ago, AKIQPilot said:

You didn't read the links I provided.  I could post dozens more if that would help.  It is not a fact that electrical power generation is getting greener every day.  Renewables have an environmental impact often as bad as some fossil fuels.  

I did read it, yes CO2 went up for a myriad of reasons one being an example was planned shutdowns of some nukes and one nuke going off line, electrical power generation is greening with technology. I've been to a few seminars the past few years where the topic was the greening of the now and the future of electrical power generation,  below is a short read from Siemens on the subject and yes they do talk about the rise in Germany's CO2. 

https://www.siemens.com/innovation/en/home/pictures-of-the-future/energy-and-efficiency/sustainable-power-generation-the-future-of-energy.html

 

[Ez ryder]

6 hours ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

It is easily transferable, but not very efficient for storing energy.

Neal

so storing fuel is not efficient ? ones it is put in a tank it cost nothing to hold it there till needed. tanks last decades and require almost no maintenance   

[sledderj]

5 hours ago, NaturallyAspirated said:

Wind has been going nuts here in the Midwest.  South Dakota went from 11% to 25% of state capacity generation via wind in short time span.  Hell, we export a massive amount, and Xcel is on pace to be the first company over  to have 10,000MW generated by wind thanks to massive farms here.

I'd like to see more nuke plants being developed too.  

We can do better and it's sad to see coal lobbying so hard to remove the Clean Power Plan.  

Neal

 

So is the 25 percent wind of overall nameplate capacity?  If it is, do you have any idea what percentage of actual total generation for SD did wind power supply?  Say over a year?

Alberta has a cool website that updates every 15 minutes and tells you what the current generation mix is.  Their grid has wind at around 10 to 15% of the total nameplate capacity.  Some days you will see wind up around 10 or 12 percent of overall generation, but it's usually down around 5, and sometimes zero.  From what I've been told, more than 25% wind generation on the grid at any time is going to lead to stability issues.  At least with current grid technology.  

 

 

[AKIQPilot]

58 minutes ago, sledderj said:

 

So is the 25 percent wind of overall nameplate capacity?  If it is, do you have any idea what percentage of actual total generation for SD did wind power supply?  Say over a year?

Alberta has a cool website that updates every 15 minutes and tells you what the current generation mix is.  Their grid has wind at around 10 to 15% of the total nameplate capacity.  Some days you will see wind up around 10 or 12 percent of overall generation, but it's usually down around 5, and sometimes zero.  From what I've been told, more than 25% wind generation on the grid at any time is going to lead to stability issues.  At least with current grid technology.  

 

 

Thats all it is.  Nameplate capacity.  Most wind generators operate at under 40% of nameplate or less.  

[NaturallyAspirated]

4 hours ago, sledderj said:

 

So is the 25 percent wind of overall nameplate capacity?  If it is, do you have any idea what percentage of actual total generation for SD did wind power supply?  Say over a year?

Alberta has a cool website that updates every 15 minutes and tells you what the current generation mix is.  Their grid has wind at around 10 to 15% of the total nameplate capacity.  Some days you will see wind up around 10 or 12 percent of overall generation, but it's usually down around 5, and sometimes zero.  From what I've been told, more than 25% wind generation on the grid at any time is going to lead to stability issues.  At least with current grid technology.  

 

 

Nameplate, which has jumped to 30% in 2016.

Net generation was about 120GWh, natural gas was 160, coal 200, and hydro 400.  So about 14% of actual supply generated.

Neal